Intel Processor 300 vs NVIDIA RTX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B) Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the Intel Processor 300 or the NVIDIA RTX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B). Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero, and the head-to-head benchmark list is empty. Consequently, there are no direct performance comparisons, no percentile deltas, and no win counts to report for either side. The percentile versus all CPUs field is identical for both parts at 50, which reflects their position in the database's overall distribution, but with no actual workloads recorded, this value carries no comparative weight.

Without measured scores, the only quantitative comparisons available come from the specification sheets. The Intel Processor 300 operates at a base clock of 3.90 GHz, while the NVIDIA RTX Spark has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. The Intel part has no boost clock listed. In terms of raw core count, the NVIDIA chip offers 20 cores and 20 threads, whereas the Intel Processor 300 provides 2 cores and 4 threads. The thread count difference is substantial: the NVIDIA part has five times the core count and five times the thread count. However, the Intel processor's per-core clock advantage at base frequency is 2.20 GHz, or roughly 129% higher than the NVIDIA part's base clock. The NVIDIA part's boost clock of 4.00 GHz narrowly exceeds the Intel base clock by 0.10 GHz, suggesting that under single-threaded boost conditions, the NVIDIA chip could approach or slightly exceed the Intel part's sustained base frequency.

The thermal design power figures differ meaningfully. The Intel Processor 300 is rated at 46 watts, while the NVIDIA RTX Spark is rated at 38 watts, an 8-watt difference in favor of the NVIDIA part. This indicates the NVIDIA chip delivers its higher core count within a lower thermal envelope, though the Intel part's higher base clock on fewer cores may allow for different power distribution. The process node also diverges sharply: Intel uses a 10 nm process at its own foundry, while NVIDIA's chip is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The smaller node typically enables higher transistor density and improved power efficiency, but without benchmark data, the practical impact on performance cannot be quantified from the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The NVIDIA RTX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B) has 20 cores and 20 threads. The Intel Processor 300 has 2 cores and 4 threads. The NVIDIA part offers 18 additional cores and 16 additional threads.

Q: What are the clock speed differences between the two?

A: The Intel Processor 300 has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and no boost clock listed. The NVIDIA RTX Spark has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. The Intel base clock is 2.20 GHz higher than the NVIDIA base clock, but the NVIDIA boost clock exceeds the Intel base clock by 0.10 GHz.

Q: Which processor has a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The NVIDIA RTX Spark is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Processor 300 uses a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. The 3 nm node is smaller than the 10 nm node by 7 nm.

Q: What type of memory does each processor support?

A: The Intel Processor 300 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The NVIDIA RTX Spark supports LPDDR5X memory in a quad-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 273.1 GB/s. The Intel part does not have a listed memory bandwidth.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. Both the Intel Processor 300 and the NVIDIA RTX Spark have the multiplier locked, meaning neither is unlocked for overclocking.

Q: What integrated graphics do the two processors include?

A: The Intel Processor 300 includes UHD Graphics 710. The NVIDIA RTX Spark includes a GB20B "Blackwell" integrated graphics solution.

Where Each One Wins

Based solely on the specification data, the NVIDIA RTX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B) wins in scenarios that benefit from high core and thread counts. Its 20 cores and 20 threads make it suited for heavily parallel workloads, such as multi-threaded rendering, compilation, or data processing tasks that can scale across many execution units. The 8 MB shared L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache also provide a larger aggregate cache footprint than the Intel part. The quad-channel LPDDR5X memory interface with 273.1 GB/s of bandwidth gives the NVIDIA chip a clear advantage in memory-intensive applications where data throughput is the limiting factor. Its lower TDP of 38 watts, combined with the 3 nm production node at TSMC, suggests it can maintain high core counts within a modest power envelope, which is relevant for mobile or thermally constrained systems.

The Intel Processor 300 wins in scenarios that rely on higher per-core clock speeds and simpler memory requirements. Its base clock of 3.90 GHz is substantially higher than the NVIDIA part's base clock, and even though the NVIDIA chip can boost to 4.00 GHz, the Intel processor's sustained base frequency on just two cores may deliver stronger single-threaded performance in lightly threaded applications. The dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 support offers flexibility across older and newer memory platforms. The 6 MB shared L3 cache is smaller, but the higher clock speed could compensate in latency-sensitive workloads. The Intel part's desktop market segment and Intel Socket 1700 compatibility position it for conventional desktop builds, whereas the NVIDIA chip targets the mobile segment. The Intel Processor 300 is also in active production and was released in January 2024, while the NVIDIA RTX Spark is marked as unreleased with a December 2025 release date, meaning the Intel part is currently available while the NVIDIA part is not.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The Intel Processor 300 uses 2 cores and 4 threads, while the NVIDIA RTX Spark uses 20 cores and 20 threads. Base clocks are 3.90 GHz for Intel and 1.70 GHz for NVIDIA; the NVIDIA part adds a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, while the Intel part has none. TDP is 46 watts for Intel and 38 watts for NVIDIA. The Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700, while the NVIDIA part has no socket listed. The Intel architecture is Raptor Lake with a codename of Raptor Lake-S, while the NVIDIA architecture field is null but the codename is N1X with a generation listed as Spark (GB10). Process nodes differ: 10 nm at Intel's foundry for the Intel part, 3 nm at TSMC for the NVIDIA part. Die sizes are 163 mm² for Intel and 208 mm² for NVIDIA, a 45 mm² difference. Cache hierarchies diverge: Intel has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3; NVIDIA has 128 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. Memory support differs: Intel uses DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, while NVIDIA uses LPDDR5X in quad-channel mode with a memory bandwidth of 273.1 GB/s. PCIe support is Gen 5 with 16 lanes for Intel, while NVIDIA lists N/A. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 710 for Intel and GB20B "Blackwell" for NVIDIA. Market segments are Desktop for Intel and Mobile for NVIDIA. Production status is Active for Intel and unreleased for NVIDIA. Release dates are January 2024 for Intel and December 2025 for NVIDIA. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $82, while the NVIDIA part has no launch MSRP listed. Part numbers are SRN3J for Intel and GSE1-675-A1 for NVIDIA. Both have locked multipliers and no ECC memory support.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between the two parts is pronounced. The Intel Processor 300 is built on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-S, which is Intel's 10 nm process produced at Intel's own foundry. This architecture uses a die size of 163 mm² and a dual-core, four-thread configuration. The cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The chip supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and it includes PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 710, and the part is designed for desktop platforms on Intel Socket 1700. Its generation is listed as Intel Processor (Raptor Lake), and it uses the part number SRN3J.

The NVIDIA RTX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B) uses a fundamentally different design. Its architecture field is null in the database, but its codename is N1X and its generation is Spark (GB10). It is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC, with a larger die size of 208 mm². The core configuration is 20 cores and 20 threads, with no hyper-threading distinction recorded. Cache sizes are larger per core: 128 KB of L1, 2 MB of L2, and 8 MB of shared L3. Memory support is exclusively LPDDR5X in a quad-channel configuration, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 273.1 GB/s. The PCIe field is listed as N/A, indicating no direct PCIe connectivity on the CPU itself. The integrated graphics are labeled GB20B "Blackwell", which aligns with NVIDIA's newer GPU architecture naming. The market segment is Mobile, and the production status is unreleased, with a release date of December 2025. The part number is GSE1-675-A1, and the manufacturer is listed as Unknown in the database.

The core count difference of 18 cores stems from entirely different design philosophies: the Intel part prioritizes high base clocks on a minimal core count, while the NVIDIA part spreads its 20 cores across a smaller process node with a boost clock that reaches 4.00 GHz. The 3 nm node at TSMC versus Intel's 10 nm node represents a generational process gap, though the Intel part's higher base clock suggests it does not rely on the smaller node to achieve frequency. The NVIDIA chip's 273.1 GB/s memory bandwidth, enabled by quad-channel LPDDR5X, is a major architectural advantage over the Intel part's dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 setup, which has no listed bandwidth figure. The absence of a socket for the NVIDIA part and its mobile segment designation indicate it is intended for integrated or soldered platforms, unlike the Intel processor's socketed desktop design. Neither part supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers. The production status difference (Active for Intel, unreleased for NVIDIA) further separates the two in terms of availability.